F 128 

■ 8 The Preservation 

. C5 G7 r 
Copy 1 

OF THE 



Historic City Hall 

OF NEW YORK, 



LETTER OF HON. ANDREW H. GREEN 
TO THE COMMISSIONERS, APPOINTED 
TO LOCATE THE SITE FOR A NEW 
MUNICIPAL BUILDING: :':':-: • 




PRINTED UNDER ,THE AUSPICES OF THE NEW YORK 
STATE SOCIETY, SONS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 



1894. 



The Preservation 



OF THE 



Historic City Hall 

OF NEW YORK. 



> 



LETTER OF HON. ANDREW hT'gREEN 
TO THE COMMISSIONERS, APPOINTED 
TO LOCATE THE SITE FOR A NEW 
MUNICIPAL BUILDING. :::::: 




PRINTED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE NEW YORK 
STATE SOCIETY, SONS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 



T894. 



£&cJtang» 
12Je ? 09 



pi ^5 



OFFICERS 



New York State Society, 
Sons of the American Revolution, 



FOR THE YEAR ENDING FEBRUARY 22, 1894. 



Chauncey M. Depew, - - - President. 

Robert B. Roosevelt, - - - Vice-President. 

Charles Waldo Haskins, - - - Secretary. 

Ira Bliss Stewart, - - - Treasurer. 

Edward Hagaman Hall, - Registrar and Historian. 

Rev. Samuel H. Virgin, D.D., - Chaplain. 

Board of Managers. 

Chauncey M. Depew, G. Creighton Webb, 

Robert B. Roosevelt, Walter S. Logan, 

Charles Waldo Haskins, Henry Hall, 

Ira Bliss Stewart, Andrew J. C. Foy£, 

Edward Hagaman Hall, John Winfield Scott, 

Samuel H. Virgin, D.D., Wm. P. Wadsworth, 

John C. Calhoun, ' Edward J. Chaffee, 

Ferdinand P. Earle, Walter J. Sears, U. S. N. 




New York, February, T894. 



To the Commissioners appointed to locate a Site 
for a Municipal Building : 

Gentlemen: 

As I was leaving the City some time since, for a brief absence, 
I noticed that a communication had been addressed to your 
Honorable Body on behalf of the Trustees of the Tilden Trust 
which, after deprecating the removal of the City Hall in the 
following terms, "much as we should regret the necessity of 
disturbing a structure consecrated to us like our City Hall by so 
many precious, historical and forensic associations," proceeds to 
propose that "should such a necessity be found to exist that 
admirable structure be transferred to the site now occupied by the 
Reservoir in Bryant Park and appropriated to the uses " of that 
Trust. 

I fully concur with my associate Trustees, in this expres- 
sion of dissent at the proposed removal of that building, as 
in every respect unwise. As this dissent, however, during some 
months past seems somehow to have ripened into their active 
approval and zealous advocacy of the scheme; from my past long 
relations with the Parks, sharing a general conviction that the 
area devoted to small Parks should be increased rather than 
deminished, I am constrained to hope that no portion of Reservoir 
Square, or any other Park, Square or open ground on this Island 
provided for the use of the people, may hereafter be appropriated 
for buildings. 



The City Hall presents an example of fine architectural taste. 
In design and construction it is as faultless as any structure in the 
City, whilst its historical and biographical relations involve events 
of paramount interest and personages of dignity and estimation, 
and as has been well said, "It stands to-day unsurpassed by any 
structure of its kind in the country." It should continue to stand 
as for nearly a century it has stood, ample, commodious and 
convenient. 

Its presence tends to keep alive associations that are near to 
very many of our citizens, a visible landmark, an object lesson to 
the people, that should not be destroyed. 

Its erection was coeval with the conception of a group of 
enterprises that distinctly marks an era in the material progress of 
the City, the State and the Nation, among which the Erie Canal, 
the laying out of the City by Rutherford, DeWitt and Morris, and 
Jefferson's magnificent scheme of a National Coast Survey are 
prominent examples. Its corner stone was laid in 1803 by Ed- 
ward Livingston, then Mayor, appointed as all Mayors of that 
period were by the Governor of the State. 

Nearly ten years elapsed before it was completed. 

It, and the ground upon which it stands, are memorable in 
the City's annals. Here upon the " Fields," or " Commons " as 
then known, Alexander Hamilton made his maiden speech on the 
occasion of closing the Port of Boston in retaliation for the 
destruction of the tea, and here the Sons of Liberty held their 
meetings to resist the assaults of the British government on the 
customs and rights of the people, and thus spoke: 

" It's well known, that it has been the custom of all nations 
to erect monuments to perpetuate the Remembrance of grand 
Events. Experience has proved that they have had a good 
effect on the Posterity of those who raised them, especially such 
as were made sacred to Liberty. Influenced by these Consider- 
ations, a number of the Friends of Liberty in this City erected 
a Pole in the Fields, on Ground belonging to the Corporation, 
as a temporary memorial of the unanimous Opposition to the 
Detestable Stamp Act." 

Here the Declaration of Independence was read to the 
American army in the presence of Washington. 

Here many events of paramount interest to the Nation,. 



State and City have been celebrated by imposing civic and 
military ceremonies. Here a grand reception was given to 
Lafayette, and the freedom of the city, in a golden box, to that 
Corypheus of Democracy, Andrew Jackson, and here four genera- 
tion of New Yorkers have been accustomed to witness' imposing 
displays. The building is indissolubly connected with its site and 
surroundings. Remove it and interest in it vanishes. 

Though with northward growth of the metropolis the City 
Hall is now near its southerly limit, with the sure coming of the 
Greater City, its present site is most central and advantageous. 
A million people to the right, just across the Hudson, and another 
million to its left, just over the East River, all within a radius of 
five miles, already find it accessible and convenient. 

It would be strange if the Historical Society, which has been 
unjustifiably quoted as in favor of removing it, did not look with 
disapproval upon the proposal, and if the vandalism of its removal 
is persisted in, that Society, if true to its objects, should bend all 
its energies to preserve it where it is, and as it is, and I believe 
would promptly reject any proffer of its dismembered ruins. 

While Independence Hall in Philadelphia no longer answers 
its original purpose, who in that City would have the effrontery to 
propose its removal and thus wipe out all visible insignia of its 
precious memories ? Or who in Boston would consent to the 
destruction of Fanueil Hall, situated in its business centre and 
adorned with memorials of that City's history. 

How long will it be before some, careless of the conservative 
influence of distinguished achievements, will want to remove 
Bunker Hill Monument or destroy the home of Washington at 
Mount Vernon? Are the principles and the works of our fathers 
wholly forgotten? Is that subtle, refining sentiment dissipated 
that delights to preserve what is left of the material environment 
of Shakespeare and Milton ? 

Are the achievements of the past to fade into oblivion? The 
moral power of association can scarcely be overestimated. It 
arouses as well the slumbering chord that responds to the inspir- 
ing strains of the "Marseillaise," awakens tender memories at 
the sympathetic melodies of "Sweet Home," and will always 
attract the thoughtful to scenes made memorable by deeds worthy 
of remembrance. 



Other than the City Hall, where in New York is there left 
a public building or monument of historic value? 

How long will our St. Paul's be left to us? Who would consent 
to the destruction of the House of Parliament in Dublin, admired 
for its noble simplicity, or look on with indifference while the 
walls of Trinity College in the same city were being laid low, that 
building which is a source of patriotic pride. Who would see 
even the ruins of Muckross Abbey scattered, or silence the bells 
of Shandon? Has Westminster Abbey no associations that are 
precious to the generations as they come and go? What would 
become of the citizen of Boston who would dare to propose a pub- 
lic building on the Common, to the consequent destruction of its 
"elms of centuries." 

If the City Hall will not serve all the purposes now required 
in a municipal building, it does and will admirably accommodate 
very many purposes, as well apartments for important city offices, 
reviews, reception of distinguished visitors, the display of statues 
and portraits of illustrious American heroes and statesmen, 
and the celebration of important events. How does it happen 
that its usefulness ceases at this particular period? Why, if it 
is so soon to be removed, did a recent administiation illustrate 
the mellow tints of its northerly front by a coat of white 
paint ? 

Considered solely as a measure of prudent economy, it should 
be let alone. Its dimensions would occupy more than the 
whole avenue front of a city block. Let it continue to be 
used for what it can be made useful, and if the Tilden Trust is to 
have it at all, let the Tilden Trust have it where it stands, and 
avoid the wasteful process of its removal. 

To tear it down and remove it to Reservoir Square would be, 
to state it mildly, little short of wanton wastefulness. The stone 
of three of its exterior walls are about all that could be utilized, 
and what is left of this would have to be recut. The taking down 
a building of this character, in itself a costly process, with the 
breakage and transportation through crowded streets for three 
miles, would render the utilizing of its disjecta membra nearly 
as, if not more, expensive than a new structure, and when its 
fragments are put together, if not changed into substantially a 
new building, would be but a make-shift, not fit for any probable 



purpose to which it would be put, and certainly not at all adapted 
to the needs of a library. Few who have not made a study of 
modern library requirements are at all aware of the progress made 
within the past few years in buildings for their accomodation. 
Very special arrangements are a necessity — to adapt a structure 
built for an entirely different purpose is a waste of money, and if 
done, entails endless expense and unending inconvenience. 

Under ordinary circumstances it would be difficult to find a 
contractor who would take the City Hall down and remove it for 
the material. 

Unquestionably, the city needs, and is quite able to supply, 
accomodations for the public business. The present housing of 
the invaluable records of the city is simply disgraceful. Provision 
for their security should have been made long ago. I agree that 
the vicinity of the City Hall Park, somewhere north of Chambers 
street, between Broadway and Chatham street, would be a proper 
place for the erection of a building adequate for all municipal 
purposes. Let the required land be purchased for it. To object 
to the cost of it seems trifling with the public intelligence when, 
by the act of removing the City Hall and the Reservoir, it is pro- 
posed to wipe out, and worse than waste, more than would be 
needed to purchase the necessary land. 

The Post-Office should never have been placed where it is. It 
-was as clear at the time of its building as now that its location 
was unwise. 

How wasteful, with one hand to be occupying with buildings, 
public places set apart in the dense parts of the city as opens for 
the popular health and pleasure, and with the other to be spend- 
ing large sums to provide more such places. Chapter 320 of the 
Laws of 1887 authorizes the expenditure of a million per annum 
for the increase of small parks. 

E-eservoir and other existing Squares are crowded in the 
warmer season with children and those seeking the freshness of 
the breezes. Not an inch of their space should be taken for 
buildings. If the Reservoir is to be removed, the ground upon 
which it stands should be left open, thus increasing its already 
too limited space. The City has been within a couple of years 
spending nearly a million to provide open ground within a 
stone's throw of the City Hall Park, and now it is proposed prac- 



tically to close that already existing and greatly used and needed. 
The great business congestion in the neighborhood of the City 
Hall is to be aggravated by the need of more room for the throngs 
that cross the Brooklyn Bridge and for the increased traffic by the 
widening of Elm Street. Space — open space — is what is needed. 
The proposed new structure practically closes the City Hall Park, 
leaving scarcely a square rod of green. 

The need for small parks about the city for breathing 
places cannot well be disputed. Why shut up those already 
existing ? 

While several large areas have been acquired by the City for 
Parks, it is interesting to look at the map of the City as de- 
vised by the Commissioners who prepared it under the act of 1807. 
On it were shown many small open squares. As the City ad- 
vanced in population, buildings of a more or less public character 
were required, and several of these open spaces were seized and 
appropriated. 

For instance, the erection of the County Court House and 
the Post Office in the City Hall Park, and the proposed appropria- 
tion of other portions of this Park; the entire occupancy by build- 
ings of Hamilton Square, and of more than one part of the Bat- 
tery, and the intermittent talk about the location of a building on 
Madison Square. 

St. John's Square, though not a public ground, has been sold 
by a corporation, that, by what it owes to the public, should have 
preserved it. 

The community is frequently startled by some scheme to 
occupy by buildings or other objectionable purpose, grounds 
bought by the city with the express and sole object of open 
space, 

Take, for example, a few projects for invading the Central 
Park. The first was by a city regiment to appropriate a portion 
of it for a parade ground. This was remonstrated against by the 
then original State Commissioners and the Legislature passed an 
Act to prevent it. Next came a scheme, favored by the subse- 
quent City Park Commissioners, of a Menagerie on one of the 
most beautiful of the open lawns. 

Next, the attempt to bury the remains of General Grant upon 
the Mall. 



Next, the impudent proposal to put the building of the 
World's Fair on the Meadows. 

Next, that monstrous plan of ruin and desecration, approved 
by the Park Commissioners themselves, of a speedway. Later, 
by consent of the Park Commissioners a proposed parade of the 
military before the Infanta, which was stopped by a storm of 
popular disapproval, and recently a scheme of somebody, repudi- 
ated, as I understand, by the Academy of Design, to put a build- 
ing for its purposes in the Park. 

So it is that the Parks are preserved by the stand of the 
people against the incapacity of those employed to protect 
them. 

It seems unwise to be expending much money to provide open 
places for the delectation of the people and at the same time to 
be appropriating greater sums to close them up. The City 
authorities and unreflecting persons appear to find it difficult to 
see all sides of the question. 

Whenever ground is needed for a public building the eye falls 
upon the open space of a Park or Square, and it is incontinently 
appropriated, forgetful of the more important need of keeping it 
open. The proposals to use Reservoir Square for a public building 
will probably encounter opposition from surrounding property 
owners who claim the right to have it kept as a valuable appur- 
tenant to their ownership, and that if the Reservoir is to be re- 
moved the space it occupies should remain open. 

It will also, have to meet the objections of those who think 
the square should be kept open for public out-of-door use, who- 
support their view by challenging attention to the throngs which 
occupy it to get air in the hot season. 

It will likewise meet opposition from those who believe it 
desirable to retain the. Reservoir for storage of water to be used 
in case of fire, and claim that as it is a structure of lesser height 
it is not as objectionable as if it were replaced by a lofty edifice. 

It is perhaps but natural that many should fail to recognize 
or fully appreciate the traditions and the struggles that made this 
an independent Republic. It is not wise to destroy the monuments- 
that keep alive these lessons. 

Visible historic memorials are objects to attract the attention 
and to gratify the finer feelings of every class. No one, however 



illiterate or however refined, can see the ancient structures of 
England, Germany or France, without having his wonder excited 
or his thinking faculties stimulated. 

One who has illustrated literature and an authority on all 
that concerns its advancement says: 

"Whatever withdraws us from the power of our senses; 
whatever makes the past, the distant or the future predominate 
over the present, advances us in the dignity of thinking beings. 
Far from me and from my friends be such frigid philosophy, as 
may conduct us indifferent and unmoved over any ground which 
has been dignified by wisdom, bravery or virtue. That man 
is little to be envied whose patriotism would not gain force upon 
the plain of Marathon or whose piety would not grow warmer 
among the ruins of Iona. " 

The Biographer of the State House in Philadelphia well says: 

" We must glance even at the incidents which preceded the 
erection of the edifice and recall those more prominent events 
in the history of the State and of the Nation, which, occurr- 
ing under the roof or within the shadows of its venerable 
■walls, give immortality to the very bricks and mortar. 

" If, in investigating the antecedents of the State House, or 
in invoking the shades of its builders, we are led into details 
•of inanimate objects otherwise trivial, we may well point to the 
fact that around them the all-potent power of association has 
set an imperishable halo whose light is now as clearly recognized 
in temporal as in spiritual illustrations. 

" Young as our country is, the actuality, so to speak, of our 
founders is already losing itself in the mists of the past; so long, 
however, as we can preserve the material objects left to us 
which those great men saw, used, or even touched, the thrill 
of vitality may still be tramsmitted unbroken." 

In a letter recently published Daniel Webster writes: 

" I well understand how you should feel excited by visiting 
such places as Kingsbridge, White Plains, Bemis Heights. I 
•never knew a man yet, nor a woman either, with a sound head 
and a good heart, that was not more or less under the power 
which those local associations exercised. It is true that place 
in these things is originally accidental ; battles might have 
been fought elsewhere, as well as at Saratoga, or" Bennington; 



nevertheless, here they were fought, and nature does not allow 
us to pass over the scene of such events with indifference, 
unless we have a good share of bluntness and stupidity, or 
unless the scenes themselves have become familiar by frequent 
visits to them. For my part I love them all, and all such as 
they. An old drum hangs up in the Senate chamber of Massa- 
chusetts, taken from the Hessians at Bennington, and I do not 
think I ever went into the room without turning to look at it. 
And that reminds me to say that I have a pair of silver sleeve 
buttons, the material of which my father picked up on and 
brought away from that same field of Bennington. If I thought 
either of my boys would not value them fifty years hence, if he 
should live so long, I believe I would begin to flog him now." 

Recognizing the potent influence of association, Massachu- 
setts, to keep alive the memory of the deeds of the fathers, has 
recently incorporated a large number of its most esteemed citizens 
as Trustees of Public Reservations, ''for the purpose of acquiring, 
holding, arranging, maintaining and opening to the public, 
under suitable regulations, beautiful and historical places and 
tracts of land within the Commonwealth" and exempting them 
from taxation. 

If that State needs more room for the public business, it 
does not pull down its State House. Shall the city of New York, 
great in wealth, in culture, and eminent in the history of the 
progress of the nation, destroy its only public memorable structure? 
I hope not. 

A brief synopsis of recent New York State legislation enacted, 
be it remembered, at the instance of the local authorities of this- 
City, testifies as well to the extreme sensitiveness of the public on 
the subject of the removal of the City Hall, as to the occupation of 
the Park by any further buildings. 

In 1888 the Legislature constituted a commission "to select 
and locate a site, conveniently situated, in the neighborhood of 
the County Court House Building, in said city, but not in the City 
Hall Park." 

In 1889 the Legislature authorized this commission to "select 
and locate a site in that portion of the City Hall Park, in the City 
of New York, which lies north of the avenue running through the 
same, immediately south of the City Hall, from Broadway to 

13 



Park Row, and east of the walk that runs adjacent to the easterly 
3ine of the City Hall and the new County Court House." 

In 1890 the Legislature authorized the Commission to "select 
and locate a site, conveniently situated in the neighborhood of 
the County Court House Building in said City, but not in the City 
Hall Park." 

In 1892 the Legislature authorized the Commissioners, in 
their discretion, to "select a site for said building in City Hall 
Park, or on land adjacent thereto." 

So, in 1888, you could not put the building in the City Hall 
Park. In 1889 you could put it there. In 1891 you could not 
put there, and in 1892 you could put it there, or on land adjacent 
thereto, in your discretion. 

I trust that discretion may be wisely exercised. Let the City 
Hall stand; occupy no foot of the Park with buildings. He who, 
for a brief space having an authoritative voice in determining 
these questions, should violate the cherished sentiments of those 
who look to the best interests of the City and consent to the con- 
sequent waste, will have to live longer than is given to most 
mortals, if he shall cease to hear their execrations. 

Than I, no one can be more anxious to give effect to 
Governor Tilden's intended benefaction to the City to which 
he rendered unexampled service. Recognizing as I do the 
propriety, the justice, of a public restoration of the means 
for its accomplishment that have been by public agencies 
so strangely diverted from Mr. Tilden's beneficent purpose, 
I should deem it unfortunate as one of those immediately 
entrusted with the execution of his intentions, to be found justify- 
ing an act that would be looked upon with disfavor by a large 
number of our citizens and tend to alienate many now well dis- 
posed towards the object of the Trust. 

What of intended benefits to the people has been taken away 
from them by public authorities, should be by public authorities 
restored to them. 

Whatever the motive, however kindly intended, if it is 
expected to satisfy the sense of the great injustice done to Gov- 
ernor Tilden through public agencies both in his life-time and 
to his memory, by a measure which involves the removal of this 
ancient edifice, it will fail to accomplish that end. 

14 



Better than the costliest monument that the opulence of the 
public treasury could devise, if it is to be forever associated with 
an offense to the worthiest of civic associations and sentiments, 
far better that some modest structure rise beneath the shades of 
the lovely valley where he first saw the light, that shall keep alive 
the memory of this illustrious man, and stand a perpetual re- 
proach to the conspirators, whose schemes and whose greed 
disturbed his declining years and frustrated the cherished pur- 
poses of a life eminently devoted to the interests of his country. 

Respectfully, 

ANDREW H. GREEN. 




IIIIIIHI? RY ° F C0NGRESS 
014 108 955 9 \ 



